Whatever happened to Starship Exeter?

As long as you are happy, that's good. I have, at times, gotten e-mails from 'scriptwriters' of fan films who feel the final product has little to do with what they wrote, and wanted their names removed from it. If and when I write a review of those (I stopped writing reviews last spring, although I have now completed the indexing work on Star Trek Reviewed, except the Go!Animate stuff which changes continuously.), I will feel the need to ask the writers if I can quote them in the review in which they choose to separate themselves from the final product. That will give them at least a half-year from release to reconsider their angry, and see if they still think the editors 'ruined' their work. (Yes, that's the word they used).

I am aware of how hard that can be. I wrote a play about 15 or 20 years ago, not science fiction, called, "The First Amendment" based closely on the real events that took place at Yale in the 1974-1975 school year, concerning issues of speech and religion, and how that played out on the Yale University college campus. The two central characters were platonic friends from different parts of the political spectrum. He had a girlfriend who was important, but not central, to the story. I had two cold readings, and what I found out was that the audience didn't care that the female friend was good to her male buddy, and was looking out for his best interest, and was strait-forward and truthful. What was more, it was clear that he found her unacceptable as a girlfriend, because he was a social climber, so it was not her 'fault' they were not a couple. Nevertheless, the audience hated the platonic girl, and loved the girlfriend, who lied and schemed throughout the play, and was only interested in getting what she wanted from the guy, even if it made him miserable. The audience wanted, "The love story, not the dumb stuff." They loved the scheming girlfriend. Since then, Smallville has had a major platonic relationship (Clark/Chloe) as a central theme, so it's a less revolutionary idea. But my audience hated it. I realized that, to make it marketable, I would have to so change the play that I had no interest in writing it.

I did start a rewrite, I just couldn't get into it.

So, I just hope whatever happens in Exeter, in Potemkin, in Polaris, in whatever projects your work on, you are happy with the outcome. The most important critics are always the people involved in the production(s).

...There is an aphorism to the effect that the movie you wind up with is never the movie you started out to make.

Click to expand...

QFT. Depending on the breaks, and which people you've landed to work on it with you, it'll either be much better than you hoped or much worse than you feared, but in either case it'll likely not be much like what you planned.

At least, that's the way it is in a collaborative, volunteer production - again, if you're lucky. Someone sitting heavily on top of the cast and crew with an inviolate "vision" is an albatross.

Click to expand...

As a director part of the trick is being able to recognize when better ideas come along, but also be able to keep the long-view so that ideas that seem great in the context of a given moment don't sabotage the bigger picture. A simple for-instance: sometimes cast have ideas for dialog changes, but sometimes those changes, while good, might break a connection to another event or piece of dialog elsewhere in the script. You have to be cautious about things like that, as, in editing you may find the dots don't connect.

Long-winded essay there. I guess the real point of the question in some ways is "will you be really happy with the show when it's done?" and the simple answer to that is yes, seeing what DS9Sega is doing with the final part of it I think all of us will be proud of it.

As a director part of the trick is being able to recognize when better ideas come along, but also be able to keep the long-view so that ideas that seem great in the context of a given moment don't sabotage the bigger picture. A simple for-instance: sometimes cast have ideas for dialog changes, but sometimes those changes, while good, might break a connection to another event or piece of dialog elsewhere in the script. You have to be cautious about things like that, as, in editing you may find the dots don't connect.

Click to expand...

During the production of "The Void," one of our cast members simply bailed on us. I had seen this character (and actor) as really critical to the episode. He was essential to my script. But when the guy only showed up for one day, we ended up giving his lines to the helmsman (and Doug did a really good job with it) and to the relief engineer (and Chris did a really good job with it). So the writer in me is pulling out my hair at what happened, and the producer in me is patting myself on the back for the way we solved the problem (and it really does work). Last night, as a writer, I was feeling disappointment in the no-show's decision not to even bother telling us he was going to bail on the project. As the producer, though, I'm happy with the way things turned out.

And in regards to changes in dialogue, I've got to admit that they never bother me. If the person speaking the lines thinks that it's more natural to say a line or two slightly different, as long as the story isn't affected and as long as it stays true to what we've seen in Trek, I've no problem with it as a writer. And as the producer, if it makes my cast member happy and my writer doesn't object, then go for it.

The realities of filmmaking, especially when dealing with tight deadlines and limited resources, are many.

Here's a horror story for you.

In 2007 I was doing the 48 Hour Film Project with TTI's Director Scott Cummins. The contest gives you only 48 hours to write, shoot, edit and deliver a 4-7 minute short in a genre that they assign you at the contest start. I wrote the script overnight and we shot the next day (Scott directing).

To make a long story short, the location we planned to shoot in first opened 4.5 hours later than we'd been promised, so the shooting order got flipped, costumes that weren't supposed to be needed until midday had to be made in the early morning, etc. By early afternoon it was apparent we were behind schedule, there were time issues with moving the crew to the final location, and we were at risk of losing one of the leads before we would finish. In order to make sure we could the whole film all the remaining shooting had to take place in the bar.

For that to happen I had to rewrite the last half of the 10 page script on the set. I did it. I wasn't happy that I had to do it, but we got the film done.

Isn't it funny how unimpressive the main viewscreen looks now that we live in the era of ginormous flat-screen displays? I remember being very impressed by the displays on the bridge when I was younger, but the modern home theater with plasma, LCD, or even organic LED technologies makes me feel like we're nearly at the point where we can check the "been there, done that" box for that aspect of Star Trek.

I wonder what other cool presentation technologies we'll have by the time the final act is released?

Isn't it funny how unimpressive the main viewscreen looks now that we live in the era of ginormous flat-screen displays? I remember being very impressed by the displays on the bridge when I was younger, but the modern home theater with plasma, LCD, or even organic LED technologies makes me feel like we're nearly at the point where we can check the "been there, done that" box for that aspect of Star Trek.

I wonder what other cool presentation technologies we'll have by the time the final act is released?

Click to expand...

That for me is also a period reality check that I find myself running into more and more often.

"*I* am making no promises. I'm just doing my part of this as speedily as I can in hopes of getting it out sooner than later. "

I thank you sir for your hard work! Even the few frames you have released have put a smile on my face. Please let us fans know if there is anything we can do to help. If we have to help pull this last Act out of drydock we want to get it out. Thank you again DS9Sega!!!

I enjoyed it when the effects people on TNG realized that the main viewer ought to be represented as a three-dimensional "space" beyond the front wall of the bridge - shooting from the side the image would show the profile of the person on it rather than flatten out. They weren't consistent about this - but then, sometimes I have trouble setting the aspect mode on my cheap DVD player.